On 28 abr, 04:45, Casper Bang <[email protected]> wrote: > > (e.g. see Linux's pathetic advanced- > > filesystem story, it's not yet in the place that Windows was >10 years > > ago with NTFS.) > > Now you're being ridiculous. Let me guess, next you're going to claim > that Microsoft's next-gen-NTFS (WinFS) was superior to state-of-the- > art on Linux (BTRFS)? Of course the former had to be cancelled, while > the latter is slated to become de-facto/default within a few years.
Both filesystems are vaporware until they are actually released and widely deployed. Read my recent post - yeah Vista didn't get the database-like filesystem that Microsoft has been promising since the Cairo plans; what what you already have in Vista&Win7 is actually a lot, remarkably atomic distributed transactions. I have tested the WinFS beta when Vista was on beta, and it was a dog. Will probably take another full rewrite or two - as usual in many Microsoft projects - until they have something usable. They are clearly working on that; Windows Server needs its own tech to compete with NetApp, ZFS and the like - perhaps the relational stuff was just the wrong vision, so it's difficult to tell what kind of advanced FS they will ship when they finally do. Meanwhile, I think btrfs will ship first as Oracle is behind it, not to mention that Oracle nows owns ZFS too and they can join forces and deliver some wonderful filesystem tech, hopefully for the benefit of the OSS community too. A+ Osvaldo -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
